Banks functioning may be affected if strike materialises

Two public sector lenders, State Bank of Mysore and United Bank of India, on Saturday said in their normal banking operations may get impacted in the event of strike on September 2 as proposed by trade unions.

Two public sector lenders, State Bank of Mysore and United Bank of India, on Saturday said in their normal banking operations may get impacted in the event of strike on September 2 as proposed by trade unions. (PTI)

Two public sector lenders, State Bank of Mysore and United Bank of India, on Saturday said in their normal banking operations may get impacted in the event of strike on September 2 as proposed by trade unions.

State Bank of Mysore in a BSE filing said the Indian Banks’ Association (IBA) informed about workmen unions serving a notice to go on all India bank strike, for one day on September 2.

“In the event of the proposed strike materialising, the functioning of the bank would be impacted,” it said in the filing.

United Bank of India informed BSE that in support of certain industry level demands certain employee associations have served a notice to IBA for a strike on September 2.

“The bank is taking all necessary steps in terms of the existing guidelines to deal with the strike in the event the strike materialises,” it said in the filing.

Most of the central trade unions have pressed to go ahead with a day’s strike on September 2, after two round of talks with government earlier this week could not reach to a solution to avert the strike.

Earlier this week, an inter-ministerial panel headed by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley had met with representatives of trade unions to discuss their 12-point charter of demands on labour issues.

Initially a total of 11 central trade unions, including BJP-backed Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS), had given a call for one-day strike on September 2 to press for their demands.

However, in a latest development today, following a meeting of trade unions among themselves yesterday and its own meeting of core committee, the BJP-backed Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) pulled out of the strike call saying it is not the best way out in view of the government’s assurances on various demands.

The government in its meeting with trade unions have assured them on various counts including mandatory minimum wage payment across sectors, hike in bonus limit, widening scope of EFPO and insurance schemes.

Strike called by trade union leaders of bank on 2nd of September 22015 in support with other trade unions of the country is in my view totally unwarranted, politically motivated and for serving the ego of only a few of leaders ociated with bank staffs. It took months and years for these leaders to opt for strike in support of wage hike but it took no time for them to decide to join strike with other trade union leaders .
When it was a matter of wage hike, none of political enies came forward to support and strengthen bank strike when they were striving hard to get their demand for wage hike accepted by central government. It took 30 months to get miserable hike of 15 % in pays and allowances of bank staff and it took further six months for notifying holidays on 2nd and 4th Saay agreed upon by Trade Unions And IBA in March 2015.
Now I try to enlighten usefulness of each demand one by one to substantiate my conclusive opinion going against happening of strike on 2nd of September .
First demand put by Leaders supporting strike on 2nd September 2015 is price rise. It may be noted here that price rise is a regular phenomenon in a developing country like India. However it was at its peak during UPA government led by Manmohan Singh. Prices of goods started falling After Modi came to power. Data on Inflation released by GOI from time to time will substantiate this truth.
However price may further be controlled by strike by attacking on ders and blackmarketeers. State Government can take punitive steps against such ders who artificially rise price. But where the prices rise is genuine, we have to raise supply by producing more and more of goods. For that leaders should attack on unwarranted exports of some goods which is cause of price rise. Instead of making price rise only a point to increase number in demand, they should suggest the ways and means to tackle the issue of price rise.
Problem of unemployment is as old as freedom of our country. It peaked after GOI accepted the policy of privatisation, liberalisation and globalisation in the year 1991. Since then position of public sector undertaking is going from bad to worse. Retrenchment or cut in employment is on rise since 1991. Computerisation in all offices and PSUs added fuel to fire. All governments of last seven decades promised to reduce unemployment , but they all failed. They stopped registration of unemplo youth in employment exchanges . They promised for quota for various castes and communities but they did not create employment opportunities. There are no chairs to sit on , but politicians are talking of reservations for various castes and groups who will sit on chair if chairs are in any office.
Public sector have almost closed the door for employment and it is only private sector which has generated few opportunities for employment . But unfortunately selfish leaders are opposing it too.
Since 1991 , vacancies in government offices are almost negligible as compared to what it used to be before 1991. Recruitment in PSUs , banks and government offices do not match even with the number of people retired during this period i.e. from 2001 to 2015. Number of staff in public sector banks is almost same what it was five to ten years ago despite rapid expansion of branch network . Number of branches have doubled and total business have grown manifold, but number of bank staff has remained almost stagnant. Staff in almost all branches and all offices have to sit late to complete task igned to them or simply to keep boss in good stream.
Trade union talk of Labour laws. All branches of almost all banks work overnight and even on Sundays and holidays. Almost all departments of government work till late night. Shops and factories work late hours, private banks and private corporates force their staff to work not less than 12 hours a day. What labour offices are doing in the country for last so many years. Which labour law has been put in force during last one decade and more.
Almost all banks are resorting to outsourcing and contract labours. What these leaders have been doing all the time during last ten years and more. Are they in deep slumber or in long hibernation. Left parties which are considered as well wisher of working cl are silent spectator of exploitation of working cl for years and decades. Bank officers are forced to commit suicide , but leaders are almost silent on why officers are to face huge burden of workload?
What is the fun of setting Rs.15000 as minimum wage if a worker has to work double the normal working hours they are supposed to work as per exiting labour laws. What labour offices are doing and what these leaders are doing. Majority of labour offices have gone defunct slowly and gradually. Even shops and Malls are open on all 7 days of the week and for more than 12 hours a day. In seventies and eighties , there used to frequent raids on factories and shops to stop exploitation of working cl. Gradually these labour exploitation protecting offices have stopped their function and keep them confined to their offices and draw ry by doing no job at all.
Leaders should explain what they mean for bank staff when they talk of universal social security. Are they concerned for old age pension or they advocate free education or free drinking water and electricity?
Bank staff use to get pension at least to the extent of half of their last ry , which ranges from Rs.15000 to Rs.45000 per month. Central government employees and armed forces are getting even more. Other sections of working cl never dream of pension . What trade union leaders were doing till now. Old age pension which is paid by GOI or state government is only few hundreds of rupees. Why advocates of social security were silent all these days?
Similarly pension to staff working in unorganised sector and modern era private companies , IT sector companies is almost negligible or not at all. When pensioners are not happy in organised sector, why do these leaders worry for private sector workers. Are they more concerned to disturb present government on some issue or the other ?
Registration of trade unions is not an issue at all. Majority of trade Unions are already registered. And if some trade unions are yet to be registered, thy can not be registered . I think unregistered trade union in organised sector represent hardly one percent of total workforce. There is practically no Trade Union in private companies of modern era. As such question of registration of trade union does not arise at all.
Trade Union leaders should make it clear what are implications of non-ratification of ILO convention 87 and 98. They should say why they support FDI in other sectors and why not in railways, insurance and defence. Bank staff are in general not aware of FDI and if they are aware , why these leaders were silent since 1991 when our government in principle accepted the policy of privatisation, liberalisation and globalisation. FDI in some form or the other has been raised by each Government since 1991. Even left parties were in power in coalition with Congress Party n UPA I and were fully in power in States like West Bengal for decades.
Trade union leaders are opposing so called disinvestment in banks. Perhaps they are not aware that due to increasing burden of provisions for bad debts , GOI is not disinvesting but investing by infusing more and more capital to banks suffering from shortage in Capital Adequacy Ratio fixed to comply International norms. Shareholdings of GOI in many banks have gone up and it will continue to go up if rise in bad debts is allowed to go up and up unabated. Fundamental cause of sickness has now become poor quality of bank ets which majority of top trade union leaders could not protect because they too work in nexus with corrupt bank officials to serve various purposes . If escalation in bad debts is not stopped soon, disaster is to happen on PS banks, none can stop it.
Last but not the least, leaders are on strike to lodge protest against Land Acquisition Bill proposed by Modi Government. They should suggest how to create employment opportunities. They should focus why Public sector undertakings have failed to perform as per expectation and why they have stopped creating employment opportunities. They should say why they did not insist for preferred financing to farmers . Why did they not stop banks which financed hundreds ad thousands of crores of rupees to high value projects and why they are unable to recover dues from them.
Trade Union Leaders of banks did not stop top officials of banks who concealed bad loans for years and decades and finally wrote off these loans or sacrificing huge amount of prinls and interest in compromise settlement with wilful defaulters just to save corrupt bank officials or to help political masters. They should say why these big loans are now bad for recovery, who are responsible for it and how many of top officials have been punished for their ill-motivated sanctions.
Are they acting as partner of top officials in causing loss to the bank?
Are they shedding Crocodile Tears when Government is talking of Land Acquisition .
After all , how growth will take place , how employment opportunities will be created and how infrastructure will grow if land is not acquired. Are they also supporter of Consent Clause?
If yes , they should say whey Parliamentarians who are supposed to be literate and people's representative do not discuss and debate these vital issues in Parliament. and why do they disturb the functioning on Parliament on non-issues.
Is there consensus on happening of strike in bank?
Have trade union leaders obtained consent of all staff or even one fourth 25% of bank staff before opting for strike on 2nd of September 2015?
When consent cannot be arrived at among literate cl of bankers, how these union leaders dream of consensus or consent among farmers is possible before acquisition of land? When Parliament and State emblies cannot arrive at consensus on any bill due to political reasons or any other reason, how one can dream of consensus of farmers of different interest and different caste before any portion of land is acquired even for any national objective.